But I think I've got Clones nailed down into a single comment..."Attack of the Clones is Pearl Harbor in Space". Both have lame love stories and bad acting, and in the end...everything goes boom!
Can someone please explain to me why they called it attack of the clones? It implies that the clone army is being raised to attack the republic when in actuality it was used to defend it. The clones didn't attack anything. It's really more like "Defense of the Clones" or something. Or "Yoda and an Army of Clones Saves Mace Windu's Ass."
At $150, I might actually buy one for the kids (aged 6 and 3). I'm thinking Santa might put one under the tree; any suggestions as to which console, taking into account the age of the kid and the fact that we have more computers in our household than people already?
If Santa is thinking about putting it under the xmas tree (as opposed to putting it under the maple tree out by the driveway) then he'd probably do well to wait until November to pick one up. By then whatever you decide to buy will probably be $50 cheaper and have even cooler games (or the console wars might have a definite winner).
Scenario 1 - MS spends $389 to build an Xbox. You buy it for $199. MS loses $190 on the sale, but makes a few bucks for each game you buy and their relative marketshare goes up a blip.
Scenario 2 - MS spends $389 to build an Xbox. You don't buy it, instead buying a Gamecube or PS2. MS loses $389 on making the Xbox, doesn't get any cut of the games you buy, and their relative marketshare goes down a blip.
Now explain to me how buying an Xbox is screwing Microsoft.
I hope this doesn't hurt Nintendo by altering mass-market perception into thinking that by offering a cheaper product, it is inferior to the PS2 and X-Box.
Pssst...here's a hint. The Gamecube was priced at $199 for many months while the XBox and PS2 were priced at $299. Do you think that the $100 price difference hurt them then? If not (you bought one, obviously), then why would you think that a $50 price difference would hurt them now?
A lot of folks seem to like Super Smash Bros as well... but that game was a bit too much for me. Too many colors and flashing lights.
I felt much the same way when I saw it. In fact, my exact comments were "This is a game that was truly designed for the ADD generation." I guess nowadays they call it ADHD though. It has 45-second levels, fashing lights, bright colors, and more crap happening onscreen than you could ever hope to notice, let alone comprehend.
Really, this guy should memorize StarWars trivia, go to SCA Festivals and various Cons, commit to marathon sessions of playing Video and fantasy role playing games, you know all the stuff we geeks do to get a life.
Yes, but we do it in a social setting. That can make a huge difference. Still, I'll give you a virtual +1 funny...
By taking time off work to see a film during working time you save how many dollars exactly on the price of the cinema ticket?
Since I'm one of those overworked salaried people I'm getting paid the same whether I'm there or not.
Round here you'd lose even if you were unemployed, because the car parking charges during the day are so much more than during the evening.
In the States most parking lots are free. Usually only in the downtown metro areas does one have to pay for parking, and there are far more cinemas in the suburbs than in the cities.
Even though the cinema that I went to was downtown, it's right across the street from the office building I work in, so parking wasn't an issue. But if I had come in though they validate the parking tickets if you buy a movie ticket, in which case parking is only $1. Not a bad deal really.
Look, I have read every CS/math book I could lay my hands on. I have been
coding since I was 13, and missed all my highschool home-comings while coding
(I didn't miss my prom.) I am also a 3rd year college student, majoring in math.
I have never seen a single star wars movie, never watch an anime, not even a comic
book. I hate computer games (specially multi-player games) but I don't mind trying
some galaga while I am waiting for my pizza at pizza hut.
You know, if you're not careful you're going to end up dead from a distinct lack of having a life. I too enjoy reading and playing with machines, but there is a time when getting out and doing something with friends (even something passive like watching a movie) is a good thing. There is far more in the world than that which is simply technical and if you fail to experience it when you are young then you will grow up to be a bitter and remorseful old man.
Now we know why so many companies go out of business.
What kind of drugs are you on? So they dropped $1000-$1500 on a movie so that their company could take a Friday afternoon off. How does that contribute to the dot-com collapse? The cost is minimal and the morale boost is tangible. If you consider the kinds of hours that most IT people work (while still being paid a salary based on 40 hours), only an idiot would say that they aren't entitled to some fun time occasionally.
How many companies have "summer hours"? I've worked for several companies that let you leave at 2:00 on Fridays during the summer. At others you have to work a couple extra hours during the week to make up for it, but it's no big deal.
At most companies that I have seen, Friday afternoons are the least productive hours of the work week anyway. A manager with a clue would probably rather channel that lack of productivity into a morale-boosting event.
It's important to do something nice for your employees every once in awhile. It's not like they're even doing that though since a Star Wars release only comes along once every few years.
I've worked at companies that spend that much money on a weeks worth of catered lunches for executive meetings. I worked at a company that spent several times that much each month to rent an auditorium for our monthly company-wide meetings.
If a company of 130 had $1000-$1500 to spend to boost company morale, I could think of far worse ways to spend it than renting out a theatre to see Star Wars. Logo'd Stress Balls or "cool" company keychains, for example. T-shirts with company mottos on them. New mouse pads for everyone. Catered box lunches for the whole gang. Special "you are a valuable member of our team" award plaques or some similar hokey bullshit. Who wants that shit when your company could rent out a theatre for a private screening of Star Wars? Duh!
We can always watch this movie at night. There are lots of movie theatres featuring it here. Is there any reason why americans should watch it at day?
Sure. For starters, a lot of people are very anxious to see it.
Secondly (I'm assuming that you're not American by the tone of your post), most Americans work 40+ hours per week, even more if you're in IT. Compared to the worldwide averages we work longer hours, so every once in awhile we feel obliged to blow off some steam by blowing off some work.
Thirdly, I saw it during the afternoon and got matinee pricing of $7.50. It's considerably more expensive than that to see it in the evening.
Of course, the companywide meeting just happened to located in the theater that was showing AotC, and lasted exactly the length of the movie.
That's funny. We closed our compatibility testing lab (where I work) for the afternoon and told everyone that we were going to an offsite technology demonstration. The theatre wasn't particularly full, but that was at 2:00 in the afternoon on Thursday at a movie theatre smack in the middle of downtown (versus the busier ones in the 'burbs).
I suspect this has alot more to do with PG-13 ratings than it does with it being "okay" to kill someone - the most extreme scene I can think of is when Obi-Wan dismembers that giant mantis-thing. Everything else is very bloodless and clean - even the decapitation of Jango, which should have been messy and horrible even with the "clean" cuts lightsabers are supposed to make.
I wondered a bit about that myself, but I'm not sure that's the case. I recall that in the Mos Eisley Cantina in EpIV when Kenobi cuts off that creatures arm it is shown lying on the floor bleeding.
No. What about the large group of Jedi on Genosia?
And how many of those Jedi were a) human, and b) shown dieing on-screen?
Or the fact that we see Jango without his armor on?
Yes, but he also dies with it on. For all intents and purposes, he's not being depicted as human when he dies.
Then focusing on humanoid forms, Jango's assistant didn't initially appear to be an ugly alien.
Not initially, but when they got to the club Anakin made it clear that she wasn't human. And when she died it was made very clear that she wasn't human. I even pointed that out in my original post on the matter.
I think you're reaching, and therefore blocked out parts that would invalidate your point. The only valid point you raise is that of innocent people dying, of which Shmi and Padme are the only two who are not militarily obligated
I don't think that I'm reaching at all, and I've certainly not raised any points related to innocence. I think that Lucas deliberatly left out scenes depicting human death because in some people's minds it's OK to kill someone if they aren't human. I imagine that all the Stormtroopers wear body armor head to toe to dehumanize them. Sure some people will say that it's for protection, but it sure doesn't provide any protection from a blaster rifle. Notice the complete and utter lack of blood in the deaths of these characters? Heck, even the monsters in the arena don't bleed when you cut or kill them. Sure there was lots of implied death, and plenty of dead bodies, but how many actual humans were depicted dieing? I'll go watch it again tonite, but I'm pretty sure that there are only those two.
What about Jengo Fett himself? I'd say getting decapitated is a pretty sure-fire way to check him off the list. Not to mention the numerous Jedi who showed up and probably died off-screen, some of whom may have been human.
And don't forget the clones - clones are people too, you know.
Do you know what I find hilarious about your post? It's that you obviously didn't read any further than the third sentence of my post, even though you quoted the relevant part of it:
Everyone else I saw in the movie being killed was either an ugly alien, a droid, or someone who was covered head to toe in battle armor to hide their "human-ness." Did anybody else notice this?
The whole point was that they don't show "humans" being killed. Everything else is fair game, but when a human being is shown being killed it's always this dramatic, dying in a loved one's arms kinda thing. So much for reading comprehension I suppose.
However, the coming to power of this government must be examined. It's head, former Senator Palpatine, engineered several diplomatic crisis and instigated a full-scale war in order to achieve dictatorial powers. He dabbled in the Sith teachings, long abhorred by the galactic public. These are not the actions of a "good guy."
That's not exatly true. Yes, Palpatine did manipulate people to his ends, but no more so than any other politician. I'd find it hard to justify a claim of him starting a full-scale war as well.
Some might cite Naboo, but that was not a war but an occupation. It didn't become a war until the peaceful Naboo with no army decided to fight against the trade Federation en masse. Even so, I would say that it was quite obvious that his intetentions were not to cause a costly and damaging war but to convince the 14-year old queen to sign a treaty with the Trade Federation that would have ultimately left him in charge of Naboo. Nobody needed to die on Naboo, but the Naboo wanted war.
Some others may cite the clone war as an example, but again this was not his war. He had rather cleverly created a situation whereby a large group of systems would separate from the Republic and he would end up ruling them. It was the Senate and the Jedi who refused to let this happen. They were the ones who initiated the war. Palpatine had cleverly created a situation where he would come out on top no matter which way the Senate went, go to war and vote him emergency powers, or let his separatist group split from the Republic and have him rule it. There is very clearly a peaceful option here but it is not the one that the republic chooses.
You know, there are a lot of posts similar to this expressing what some might consider to be "unpopular" opinions that are intended to encourage reflection, or just looking at things from a different point of view. The thing that pisses me off the most is that invariably some ignorant fuck-chimp comes by and mods it as flamebait. Why are people so incabaple of looking at the flipside? Are the readers of Slashdot such closed-minded bigots that they cannot consider a difference of opinion without modding it down?
Reminds me of the time I came in late on one of the Star Trek movies and missed the set up. What I saw was a bunch of handsome/cute creatures (the starship) beating up the ugly Klingons for no reason whatsoever. I came to the conclusion that this was how hollywood sees the world: the triumph of the beautiful.
I found your comment interesting if for no other reason than I found myself counting how many humans I saw killed in Episode II. Not during the movie, but afterwards as I was reflecting on it. As near as I can tell only 2 humans were shown being killed. One of them was Padme's decoy in the beginning, the other was Anakin's mother at the raider camp. Both of them died in the arms of a beloved friend or family member.
Everyone else I saw in the movie being killed was either an ugly alien, a droid, or someone who was covered head to toe in battle armor to hide their "human-ness." Did anybody else notice this?
And before you comment about Fett's hired assasin, remember that she was a "changeling" alien, not a human.
Episode I makes it clear that it's Palpatine who is behind the bureaucratic mess that plagues the Senate. He's trying to discredit Chancellor Velorum so that he can become Chancellor. Palpatine (as Darth Sidious) admits to this.
While there may be some truth to this statement, it's patently absurd to think that the Glactic Senate would be anything but the way that Palpatine describes it. Here in the US we have a senate made up of 100 Senators from 50 different states. It's a beurocratic nightmare to get any sort of benficial legislation passed. It often takes years to get enough of a consensus on important matters to pass legislation. Now multiply all the legislative gridlock of the US Senate by a factor of tens of thousands of different Senators from different worlds with different interests and then explain to me how it could possibly be anything besides much much much worse. An even more apt example is probably to look at the United Nations multiple by many thousands. The UN doesn't get squat done, they have little real power, and what power they usually have is derived from a few powerful countries who basically control it.
Oh yeah, and that remark about Pinochet being a benign dictator. Saying that Pinochet's rule in Chile was acceptable is like saying that a little bit of murder is OK, just not too much. How many innocent people is it OK to murder? 100? 1000? 10,000?
I guess that you would have to ask President Dubby on that matter. How much collateral damage is acceptable? How many times can you kill truckloads or villages of innocent civilians in the name of killing terrorists? The Empire's destruction of Alderaan is very little different from Dubby's threats that "we will make no distinction between terrorists and those countries who harbor terrorists." Sometimes the good have to suffer with the bad for the greater good. I'm sure it sucks if you're the one suffering, but nobody ever said life is fair, just, or equitable.
He makes an interesting case, but ignores the fact that the chancellor manipulates a fake war to consolidate his power, causing the death of numerous individuals, many of them Jedi.
That's where you're wrong, and it's one of the things that was most endearing to me about the Emperor/Chancellor Palpatine. He honestly believes that he's doing the right thing, even if he's using somewhat shady methods. He didn't start a war, he put the people in a position to make a decision: let the separatists separate and then he will rule them, or have the Republic give him absolute authority to "keep the separatists in line." That was my favorite part of the movie. It didn't matter in the slightest what the Senate or the Jedi decided to do because Palpatine was going to win in the either way.
The whole thing could have just as easily been resolved peacefully if the separatists had been allowed to go their own way. Palpatine was very clever in that he was going to get what he wanted no matter how it turned out, but it was the Senate and the Jedi that made it a war. I'm not so sure how what the republic did was any different than an abusive man telling his wife/girlfriend that he'll kill her if she tries to leave him.
Ergo be damned, I miss the Atari and (blast from the past) Wico joysticks of old. They withstood my lower-middle-class whiteboy-in-an-ethnic-neighborhood angst, plowing photon torpedos against the Krylons in Star Raiders.
Krylons? The evil overlords of paint?
At any rate, while the Atari 2600 joysticks were nearly indestructible, they weren't my favorite. The best joystick ever invented (and I've yet to find it's equal anywhere in the land of PC or console) was the Epyx 500XJ. Ergonomic, gave solid feedback with it's switches and was durable too.
I could be wrong but i believe 3.5 was really NT 1.0, marketing issues made it 3.5
You're both wrong, the initial release of Windows NT was Windows NT 3.1, and it was called 3.1 because MS didn't want their newest, latest and greatest technology to look like it was lower tech than Windows 3.1 which was currently shipping. If you accept the alternative argument, you might be able to get to version 3.1 if you included OS/2 1.0 and 2.0 in the history of NT since NT was largely derived from the work that MS had done on OS/2.
they work, whereas PC games, if they even install, crash after you've got halfway through a level.
Sounds like someone needs to work on their PC skills. Either that or quit trying to run PC games in a Wine session running on a Linux PPC system. I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I do play frequently and it has been a long time since I've had any of the kinds of problems that you mention.
The thing is, since everyone uses PCs nowdays, even thinks that makes them an "expert." That couldn't be farther from the truth.
all that antibacterial soap shit gonna
kill you one day...
not really kidding in case you are wondering
If only I hadn't spent my mod points earlier today, I'd give you another +1. For the curious, check out The Coming Plague. It's a good read and explains fairly well in layman's terms where we're going wrong, and what the consequences are.
I'm really not sure that we should be taking the word of someone about "what really happened in Tunguska" whenever he/she can't even manage to spell it correctly, even though the post that he/she is responding to DOES have it already spelled out for them.
Slashdot Mirror
But I think I've got Clones nailed down into a single comment..."Attack of the Clones is Pearl Harbor in Space". Both have lame love stories and bad acting, and in the end...everything goes boom!
Can someone please explain to me why they called it attack of the clones? It implies that the clone army is being raised to attack the republic when in actuality it was used to defend it. The clones didn't attack anything. It's really more like "Defense of the Clones" or something. Or "Yoda and an Army of Clones Saves Mace Windu's Ass."
At $150, I might actually buy one for the kids (aged 6 and 3). I'm thinking Santa might put one under the tree; any suggestions as to which console, taking into account the age of the kid and the fact that we have more computers in our household than people already?
If Santa is thinking about putting it under the xmas tree (as opposed to putting it under the maple tree out by the driveway) then he'd probably do well to wait until November to pick one up. By then whatever you decide to buy will probably be $50 cheaper and have even cooler games (or the console wars might have a definite winner).
Screw Microsoft - buy the X-Box
Not really, think of it this way:
Scenario 1 - MS spends $389 to build an Xbox. You buy it for $199. MS loses $190 on the sale, but makes a few bucks for each game you buy and their relative marketshare goes up a blip.
Scenario 2 - MS spends $389 to build an Xbox. You don't buy it, instead buying a Gamecube or PS2. MS loses $389 on making the Xbox, doesn't get any cut of the games you buy, and their relative marketshare goes down a blip.
Now explain to me how buying an Xbox is screwing Microsoft.
I hope this doesn't hurt Nintendo by altering mass-market perception into thinking that by offering a cheaper product, it is inferior to the PS2 and X-Box.
Pssst...here's a hint. The Gamecube was priced at $199 for many months while the XBox and PS2 were priced at $299. Do you think that the $100 price difference hurt them then? If not (you bought one, obviously), then why would you think that a $50 price difference would hurt them now?
A lot of folks seem to like Super Smash Bros as well... but that game was a bit too much for me. Too many colors and flashing lights.
I felt much the same way when I saw it. In fact, my exact comments were "This is a game that was truly designed for the ADD generation." I guess nowadays they call it ADHD though. It has 45-second levels, fashing lights, bright colors, and more crap happening onscreen than you could ever hope to notice, let alone comprehend.
Really, this guy should memorize StarWars trivia, go to SCA Festivals and various Cons, commit to marathon sessions of playing Video and fantasy role playing games, you know all the stuff we geeks do to get a life.
Yes, but we do it in a social setting. That can make a huge difference. Still, I'll give you a virtual +1 funny...
By taking time off work to see a film during working time you save how many dollars exactly on the price of the cinema ticket?
Since I'm one of those overworked salaried people I'm getting paid the same whether I'm there or not.
Round here you'd lose even if you were unemployed, because the car parking charges during the day are so much more than during the evening.
In the States most parking lots are free. Usually only in the downtown metro areas does one have to pay for parking, and there are far more cinemas in the suburbs than in the cities.
Even though the cinema that I went to was downtown, it's right across the street from the office building I work in, so parking wasn't an issue. But if I had come in though they validate the parking tickets if you buy a movie ticket, in which case parking is only $1. Not a bad deal really.
Look, I have read every CS/math book I could lay my hands on. I have been coding since I was 13, and missed all my highschool home-comings while coding (I didn't miss my prom.) I am also a 3rd year college student, majoring in math.
I have never seen a single star wars movie, never watch an anime, not even a comic book. I hate computer games (specially multi-player games) but I don't mind trying some galaga while I am waiting for my pizza at pizza hut.
You know, if you're not careful you're going to end up dead from a distinct lack of having a life. I too enjoy reading and playing with machines, but there is a time when getting out and doing something with friends (even something passive like watching a movie) is a good thing. There is far more in the world than that which is simply technical and if you fail to experience it when you are young then you will grow up to be a bitter and remorseful old man.
I didnt, i saw the telesync VCD on my computer (With TV-out) many days before.
Ooooh, you are 1337!!! The rest of us saw it in THX sound on a 65 foot-high concave projection screen with zero pixellation. Sucks to be you I guess.
Now we know why so many companies go out of business.
What kind of drugs are you on? So they dropped $1000-$1500 on a movie so that their company could take a Friday afternoon off. How does that contribute to the dot-com collapse? The cost is minimal and the morale boost is tangible. If you consider the kinds of hours that most IT people work (while still being paid a salary based on 40 hours), only an idiot would say that they aren't entitled to some fun time occasionally.
How many companies have "summer hours"? I've worked for several companies that let you leave at 2:00 on Fridays during the summer. At others you have to work a couple extra hours during the week to make up for it, but it's no big deal.
At most companies that I have seen, Friday afternoons are the least productive hours of the work week anyway. A manager with a clue would probably rather channel that lack of productivity into a morale-boosting event.
It's important to do something nice for your employees every once in awhile. It's not like they're even doing that though since a Star Wars release only comes along once every few years.
I've worked at companies that spend that much money on a weeks worth of catered lunches for executive meetings. I worked at a company that spent several times that much each month to rent an auditorium for our monthly company-wide meetings.
If a company of 130 had $1000-$1500 to spend to boost company morale, I could think of far worse ways to spend it than renting out a theatre to see Star Wars. Logo'd Stress Balls or "cool" company keychains, for example. T-shirts with company mottos on them. New mouse pads for everyone. Catered box lunches for the whole gang. Special "you are a valuable member of our team" award plaques or some similar hokey bullshit. Who wants that shit when your company could rent out a theatre for a private screening of Star Wars? Duh!
We can always watch this movie at night. There are lots of movie theatres featuring it here. Is there any reason why americans should watch it at day?
Sure. For starters, a lot of people are very anxious to see it.
Secondly (I'm assuming that you're not American by the tone of your post), most Americans work 40+ hours per week, even more if you're in IT. Compared to the worldwide averages we work longer hours, so every once in awhile we feel obliged to blow off some steam by blowing off some work.
Thirdly, I saw it during the afternoon and got matinee pricing of $7.50. It's considerably more expensive than that to see it in the evening.
Of course, the companywide meeting just happened to located in the theater that was showing AotC, and lasted exactly the length of the movie.
That's funny. We closed our compatibility testing lab (where I work) for the afternoon and told everyone that we were going to an offsite technology demonstration. The theatre wasn't particularly full, but that was at 2:00 in the afternoon on Thursday at a movie theatre smack in the middle of downtown (versus the busier ones in the 'burbs).
I suspect this has alot more to do with PG-13 ratings than it does with it being "okay" to kill someone - the most extreme scene I can think of is when Obi-Wan dismembers that giant mantis-thing. Everything else is very bloodless and clean - even the decapitation of Jango, which should have been messy and horrible even with the "clean" cuts lightsabers are supposed to make.
I wondered a bit about that myself, but I'm not sure that's the case. I recall that in the Mos Eisley Cantina in EpIV when Kenobi cuts off that creatures arm it is shown lying on the floor bleeding.
No. What about the large group of Jedi on Genosia?
And how many of those Jedi were a) human, and b) shown dieing on-screen?
Or the fact that we see Jango without his armor on?
Yes, but he also dies with it on. For all intents and purposes, he's not being depicted as human when he dies.
Then focusing on humanoid forms, Jango's assistant didn't initially appear to be an ugly alien.
Not initially, but when they got to the club Anakin made it clear that she wasn't human. And when she died it was made very clear that she wasn't human. I even pointed that out in my original post on the matter.
I think you're reaching, and therefore blocked out parts that would invalidate your point. The only valid point you raise is that of innocent people dying, of which Shmi and Padme are the only two who are not militarily obligated
I don't think that I'm reaching at all, and I've certainly not raised any points related to innocence. I think that Lucas deliberatly left out scenes depicting human death because in some people's minds it's OK to kill someone if they aren't human. I imagine that all the Stormtroopers wear body armor head to toe to dehumanize them. Sure some people will say that it's for protection, but it sure doesn't provide any protection from a blaster rifle. Notice the complete and utter lack of blood in the deaths of these characters? Heck, even the monsters in the arena don't bleed when you cut or kill them. Sure there was lots of implied death, and plenty of dead bodies, but how many actual humans were depicted dieing? I'll go watch it again tonite, but I'm pretty sure that there are only those two.
What about Jengo Fett himself? I'd say getting decapitated is a pretty sure-fire way to check him off the list. Not to mention the numerous Jedi who showed up and probably died off-screen, some of whom may have been human.
And don't forget the clones - clones are people too, you know.
Do you know what I find hilarious about your post? It's that you obviously didn't read any further than the third sentence of my post, even though you quoted the relevant part of it:
Everyone else I saw in the movie being killed was either an ugly alien, a droid, or someone who was covered head to toe in battle armor to hide their "human-ness." Did anybody else notice this?
The whole point was that they don't show "humans" being killed. Everything else is fair game, but when a human being is shown being killed it's always this dramatic, dying in a loved one's arms kinda thing. So much for reading comprehension I suppose.
However, the coming to power of this government must be examined. It's head, former Senator Palpatine, engineered several diplomatic crisis and instigated a full-scale war in order to achieve dictatorial powers. He dabbled in the Sith teachings, long abhorred by the galactic public. These are not the actions of a "good guy."
That's not exatly true. Yes, Palpatine did manipulate people to his ends, but no more so than any other politician. I'd find it hard to justify a claim of him starting a full-scale war as well.
Some might cite Naboo, but that was not a war but an occupation. It didn't become a war until the peaceful Naboo with no army decided to fight against the trade Federation en masse. Even so, I would say that it was quite obvious that his intetentions were not to cause a costly and damaging war but to convince the 14-year old queen to sign a treaty with the Trade Federation that would have ultimately left him in charge of Naboo. Nobody needed to die on Naboo, but the Naboo wanted war.
Some others may cite the clone war as an example, but again this was not his war. He had rather cleverly created a situation whereby a large group of systems would separate from the Republic and he would end up ruling them. It was the Senate and the Jedi who refused to let this happen. They were the ones who initiated the war. Palpatine had cleverly created a situation where he would come out on top no matter which way the Senate went, go to war and vote him emergency powers, or let his separatist group split from the Republic and have him rule it. There is very clearly a peaceful option here but it is not the one that the republic chooses.
You know, there are a lot of posts similar to this expressing what some might consider to be "unpopular" opinions that are intended to encourage reflection, or just looking at things from a different point of view. The thing that pisses me off the most is that invariably some ignorant fuck-chimp comes by and mods it as flamebait. Why are people so incabaple of looking at the flipside? Are the readers of Slashdot such closed-minded bigots that they cannot consider a difference of opinion without modding it down?
Reminds me of the time I came in late on one of the Star Trek movies and missed the set up. What I saw was a bunch of handsome/cute creatures (the starship) beating up the ugly Klingons for no reason whatsoever. I came to the conclusion that this was how hollywood sees the world: the triumph of the beautiful.
I found your comment interesting if for no other reason than I found myself counting how many humans I saw killed in Episode II. Not during the movie, but afterwards as I was reflecting on it. As near as I can tell only 2 humans were shown being killed. One of them was Padme's decoy in the beginning, the other was Anakin's mother at the raider camp. Both of them died in the arms of a beloved friend or family member.
Everyone else I saw in the movie being killed was either an ugly alien, a droid, or someone who was covered head to toe in battle armor to hide their "human-ness." Did anybody else notice this?
And before you comment about Fett's hired assasin, remember that she was a "changeling" alien, not a human.
Episode I makes it clear that it's Palpatine who is behind the bureaucratic mess that plagues the Senate. He's trying to discredit Chancellor Velorum so that he can become Chancellor. Palpatine (as Darth Sidious) admits to this.
While there may be some truth to this statement, it's patently absurd to think that the Glactic Senate would be anything but the way that Palpatine describes it. Here in the US we have a senate made up of 100 Senators from 50 different states. It's a beurocratic nightmare to get any sort of benficial legislation passed. It often takes years to get enough of a consensus on important matters to pass legislation. Now multiply all the legislative gridlock of the US Senate by a factor of tens of thousands of different Senators from different worlds with different interests and then explain to me how it could possibly be anything besides much much much worse. An even more apt example is probably to look at the United Nations multiple by many thousands. The UN doesn't get squat done, they have little real power, and what power they usually have is derived from a few powerful countries who basically control it.
Oh yeah, and that remark about Pinochet being a benign dictator. Saying that Pinochet's rule in Chile was acceptable is like saying that a little bit of murder is OK, just not too much. How many innocent people is it OK to murder? 100? 1000? 10,000?
I guess that you would have to ask President Dubby on that matter. How much collateral damage is acceptable? How many times can you kill truckloads or villages of innocent civilians in the name of killing terrorists? The Empire's destruction of Alderaan is very little different from Dubby's threats that "we will make no distinction between terrorists and those countries who harbor terrorists." Sometimes the good have to suffer with the bad for the greater good. I'm sure it sucks if you're the one suffering, but nobody ever said life is fair, just, or equitable.
He makes an interesting case, but ignores the fact that the chancellor manipulates a fake war to consolidate his power, causing the death of numerous individuals, many of them Jedi.
That's where you're wrong, and it's one of the things that was most endearing to me about the Emperor/Chancellor Palpatine. He honestly believes that he's doing the right thing, even if he's using somewhat shady methods. He didn't start a war, he put the people in a position to make a decision: let the separatists separate and then he will rule them, or have the Republic give him absolute authority to "keep the separatists in line." That was my favorite part of the movie. It didn't matter in the slightest what the Senate or the Jedi decided to do because Palpatine was going to win in the either way.
The whole thing could have just as easily been resolved peacefully if the separatists had been allowed to go their own way. Palpatine was very clever in that he was going to get what he wanted no matter how it turned out, but it was the Senate and the Jedi that made it a war. I'm not so sure how what the republic did was any different than an abusive man telling his wife/girlfriend that he'll kill her if she tries to leave him.
Ergo be damned, I miss the Atari and (blast from the past) Wico joysticks of old. They withstood my lower-middle-class whiteboy-in-an-ethnic-neighborhood angst, plowing photon torpedos against the Krylons in Star Raiders.
Krylons? The evil overlords of paint?
At any rate, while the Atari 2600 joysticks were nearly indestructible, they weren't my favorite. The best joystick ever invented (and I've yet to find it's equal anywhere in the land of PC or console) was the Epyx 500XJ. Ergonomic, gave solid feedback with it's switches and was durable too.
I could be wrong but i believe 3.5 was really NT 1.0, marketing issues made it 3.5
You're both wrong, the initial release of Windows NT was Windows NT 3.1, and it was called 3.1 because MS didn't want their newest, latest and greatest technology to look like it was lower tech than Windows 3.1 which was currently shipping. If you accept the alternative argument, you might be able to get to version 3.1 if you included OS/2 1.0 and 2.0 in the history of NT since NT was largely derived from the work that MS had done on OS/2.
they work, whereas PC games, if they even install, crash after you've got halfway through a level.
Sounds like someone needs to work on their PC skills. Either that or quit trying to run PC games in a Wine session running on a Linux PPC system. I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I do play frequently and it has been a long time since I've had any of the kinds of problems that you mention.
The thing is, since everyone uses PCs nowdays, even thinks that makes them an "expert." That couldn't be farther from the truth.
all that antibacterial soap shit gonna kill you one day...
not really kidding in case you are wondering
If only I hadn't spent my mod points earlier today, I'd give you another +1. For the curious, check out The Coming Plague. It's a good read and explains fairly well in layman's terms where we're going wrong, and what the consequences are.
I'm really not sure that we should be taking the word of someone about "what really happened in Tunguska" whenever he/she can't even manage to spell it correctly, even though the post that he/she is responding to DOES have it already spelled out for them.